Sunday, April 27, 2014

This isn't a post about social business—it's about doing business in a connected age, and this is an important distinction. Let me take a step back for a moment. In April 2009, exactly five years ago I took a chance and joined a start up that didn't have a name at the time and only a handful of employees. That start-up ended up being called Dachis Group, which was recently acquired by SaaS platform Sprinklr. There was a single reason I joined the emerging organization in pre-infancy. Jeff Dachis, who co-founded Razorfish—one of the original digital agencies said the following sequence of words which I had never heard before, and deeply resonated with me.

Social Business Design

While my time with the start-up was brief, I never wavered from the belief that was core to what social business stood for. Everything had changed, and while we were a handful of true believers at the time, we all instinctively knew that the way business functioned was going to be impacted for the years to come. Now fast-forward five years later...

I touch a lot of clients and initiatives and our engagements can range from producing a regular and relevant stream of content for our client's brands to working side by side with them to figure out the infrastructure needed to support different forms of engagement with a variety of stakeholders. I had been spending some time recently on our beta version of "Dairy Hub"—one of the latest manifestations of evolution we've undertaken with our willing parters of the US dairy industry and it dawned upon me this is just scratching the surface of what we used to call social business. And looking forward, it's simply how all business will operate in one way or another (many are well on their way).

However, the "Dairy Hub" alone isn't social business—it's one of many initiatives which were driven by a strategy and vision to bring the industry together and create value for a variety of stakeholders. The real story behind the the evolution had more to do with how we collaborated with the CEO of DMI and his team and aligning their efforts as well as ours over the years. It's the heavy lifting stuff you don't always hear about but is always necessary for real change to occur. It takes years.

More on Dairy another time—back to doing business in a connected age. Below are a few areas which are highly relevant to how business needs to continue to change moving forward. They are how...

The Cloud Connects UsCloud technologies are eliminating the need for consumers and enterprises to store massive amounts of data by themselves through offering up an infrastructure which allows businesses to set up shop virtually overnight and empowers data sharing like we've never seen before. It's also potentially a security nightmare.

Content Connects UsAs advertising becomes gradually easier to ignore or skip—brands are under pressure to leverage all forms of content which either educate, inform or entertain us. Never have brands had to work so hard to get their target audience to pay attention to them.

Mobility Connects UsPay close attention to Facebook's strategy of unbundling the Facebook experience into an ecosystem of mobile first experiences. Mobility is on it's way to becoming the dominant way people interact with technology. Facebook understands this, having learned the hard way originally putting the desktop experience before mobile.

Sharing Connects UsIt's been described as the sharing or collaborative economy, but it's yet another way that connecting is changing the face of how we want to exchange goods and services. E-commerce allowed us to buy new or used—now we can connect to those who can help us get our needs met perhaps without actually buying anything.

The thing that's driving massive change in organizations today is the fact that we've become connected in a number of ways that haven't existed in the past. It's bigger than social. It's bigger than mobile. It's bigger than wearables. And it will take years to work through as connections empower individuals across the board.

Monday, January 12, 2009

What you are looking at is a small sample of conversations that were happening on Twitter just hours ago. Cat Zwicker-Grant, who works in the Real Estate business also writes a blog. On her blog, she recently wrote on behalf of her friend who could not get a refund from Priceline. The circumstances though were understandable. Cat's friend had a baby who suffered from severe burns and could not travel. But Priceline wouldn't budge. Here's what happened next in Cat's own words.

"I opened Aaron’s email around 12:00PM PST I posted a Blog on Google describing the events and then sent a Tweet Blast around 2 if my tweets are logging PST, which is possible as I have no sense of time. Then I specifically re-tweeted to people with larger follows to help make sure I was heard. Aaron called me at 4 PM PST which is 7 in North Carolina and said that, “Priceline had called about an hour ago and offered to refund the money!”

Before you go crediting "social media" to this, know that Priceline had acknowledged several phonecalls from all different parts of the country. No doubt, this was tied to spark that Cat was just getting started on. Cat has a modest following on Twitter, with 148 followers. What's not modest about her is her smarts. She immediately started reaching out to people with significant influence and even MORE importantly, people who would take ACTION, like a simple phone call.

Priceline may have stopped a negative groundswell against them, before it ever had a chance. The retweets (twitter's own version of "viral") were already starting. The ripples were just being formed. Now what we don't know is if Priceline was listening—saw her blog post (with a moving image of the baby) or started to see the action happen on twitter but we do know that they made a decision that humanized the company. It's quite possible that Priceline saved themselves from a social media headache before most of us even knew abvout it. Whether it was because of the phone calls or tiny ripples forming, Priceline deserves credit for being a company that cares. Which isn't easy in this economy. Kudos to you Priceline!

Monday, August 25, 2008

Upon arriving back home from a week-long vacation, I was unpleasantly surprised to return to a house with no cable, internet or phone service. This came at especially bad timing as my wife had recently lost her mobile phone. After calling our provider (Comcast) and getting a generic message about an outage, (post navigating through the confusing phone menu) I opted to wait it out for the afternoon as the recording recommended.

By evening we had no service and after waiting on the line again I had finally gotten through only to get the expected "we'll send a technician between the hours of..." message. The Comcastic puppets couldn't put a smile on my face at this point (actually, they've always creeped me out), but Frank—a Comcast employee who provides customer service on Twitter did.

Within a few minutes on a Sunday evening, Frank responded to my complaint letting me know that it was most likely not an outage in my area, but a problem at my house. He also guided me through a process that would have fixed it (if I had a amplifier vs. a splitter), but it was still nice to get the education on the difference, not to mention the personal touch delivered through what is supposed to be an impersonal medium.

I've spoken aboutat length, the real opportunity for organizations looking to figure out how to tap the power of the social movement lies on the experience side more so than the marketing. Whether it's consumer or enterprise, companies can gleam insights from customers and actually extend the customer experience as I've outlined in my story, Critics may say it's a waste of time—especially when tapping relatively small networks such as Twitter, but I believe this is a strategy built of fragmentation and niche value vs. mass appeal. Digital channels have evolved in to infinite touch points meaning that technology has permeated our lifestyles in a very organic fashion. Networks offer us a glimpse of what the potential is for companies to provide better experiences in an automated age.

If I have a problem with my Comcast service—I'll probably ping Frank again. You might make a phone call, but a good experience at the root is built on empathy and understanding how people want to interact with you. Franks knows that while I don't use my phone as much as I used to—I still crave human contact and a helping hand. Nice to know I can get it in a way that aligns with my lifestyle.

Wednesday, July 16, 2008

Upon recently talking about micro-interactions to the folks at Citi, I had a “micro-epiphany.” It occurred to me that companies really need to be looking at the social revolution for possibly one reason over everything else. Insights into human behavior that can lead to future innovations or even product/service improvements. Point in case, as I was talking about some of the interactions I’ve had with brands on Twitter like Southwest or Zappos, I said something like “this isn’t about immediately jumping onto Twitter or any other network, it’s about making an observation that people are craving live interactions with other people who happen to work at the companies they buy stuff from”. I went on to emphasize that they way I knew this wasn’t based on research, but my own personal observations and a willingness to take a step back and connect the dots.

Think about it, as spoiled as we are with great brands such as Trader Joes, NetFlicks, and Apple—when it comes to customer service we’ve unfortunately become accustomed to layers of poorly designed pre-recorded menus and canned responses that don’t actually help us. Companies have streamlined operations to the point where we assume it will take forever to speak to a live person who can actually help us. Or if we get a live person, we’re disappointed. Then all of a sudden a few companies start helping people via a network such as Twitter and we’re are all over it, happy to spread the news that someone is out there listening. To me the insight is this: We’ve become so starved for authentic live human contact that when it’s offered up to us we are all to happy to rejoice and tell the world.

As with many professions, digital has made certain things more accessible to people with potential. Some of the most forward thinking companies like IDEO have invested in hiring anthropologists, people who combine an intuitive curiosity with a learned skill for observation and pattern detection. These anthropologists come from all backgrounds, and the really good ones have developed methods and toolboxes for capturing behaviors in the hopes of uncovering the insights they are looking for.

Today, a big part of that toolbox has become the Web, which lowers the bar for curious people who can detect patterns but perhaps haven’t earned their formal degrees in the social sciences or have the experience of recording hours of behavior via A/V equipment. But there is a catch. You have to be willing to investigate, spend time in the virtual communities—you have to participate to some extent and you have to develop your own system for capturing data whether it be tagging via delicious, favoriting links or archiving media.

The big shift is that the new kind of “digital ethnography” I’m describing is there for those willing to do what it takes to uncover those insights. No special degree or professional recording equipment required. I’m fairly certain some company out there is going to tap into this idea of “direct engagement”—live interactions with real breathing people enabled by digital technology. Could be video, text, audio or a combination of all three. But I’m fairly certain that the small percentage of people who are experiencing it through networks such as Twitter are acting as collective canaries in coalmines signaling a desire for more live human connectivity vs. artificial intelligence. If you can relate to some of the things I've said here, then you just might be a digital anthropologist. At least, that’s my gut feeling.

Tuesday, April 29, 2008

So here's a presentation I gave recently to a client. I'm thinking through the concepts of "Micro Interactions" and "Direct Engagement". The slideshow (download PDF) includes both previous and new thoughts and was inspired by a quote I wrote for Inspire UX:

“We live in a world where the little things really do matter. Each
encounter no matter how brief is a micro interaction which makes a
deposit or withdrawal from our rational and emotional subconscious.
The sum of these interactions and encounters adds up to how we feel
about a particular product, brand or service. Little things.
Feelings. They influence our everyday behaviors more than we realize.”

Monday, March 10, 2008

Matthew Milan is a smart and talented colleague at Critical Mass that I have the honor of collaborating with from time to time. If you're looking for some inspiration on how to cultivate insights, you might want to check out his Leading With Insight slideshow. Matthew will also be speaking at the IA summit. Don't miss him.

"In a world of social networking and conversations among bloggers,
consumers and everyone else, you don't advertise to them, you advertise
with them. So companies have to design spaces--or politically ask to
join existing networks--where people have a purpose to pursue (if only
fun). Las Vegas is a prototype where people can network before, during
and after an experience--going to Vegas baby!

Think of creating these kinds of event social networks around
weddings, graduations, bat mitzvahs, grandpas 90th and mom and dad's 50
wedding anniversary--any ceremonial event. And put it on iPhones,
please--mobility is pretty critical.

This little discussion moved from blogs and social networking to
utility and usefulness. I'll say more on this soon because I think the
entire advertising/marketing and /media/journalism industries are being
reshaped by digital tools empowering individuals around the world."

And this of course inspired me to talk about what I like to call the "3 U's". Here's how it breaks down:

UsefulnessAny experience is useful when it's meaningful and serves a purpose. Currently much of marketing still breaks down into self-serving gimmicks and interruptions that offer little value. Much of what's offered in digital is no exception. While the majority of criticism is of traditional advertising, the fact of the matter is that interruptive based traditional digital advertising is not much better. These are the digital gimmicks that work to get your attention but are usually done so poorly that they offer no value whatsoever. Usefulness is the exact opposite.

UtilityUtility = interaction that delights us in some way. But hold the iPhone. The industry has hijacked the word delight and brainwashed us to think that only companies like Apple and Disney are capable of serving it up. Let me tell you a story about the "no-frills" Craigslist, which just happened this morning. My wife took pictures of a large playset we wanted to sell. She uploaded them at 10:00 A.M. By noon, she had several people interested and she sold the set in time for a late lunch. We had the set dismantled, picked up and were $100.00 richer that evening. That's delight in the application economy.

UnityThe promise of social features being designed into experiences is that it somehow brings us together in a fragmented world. Even though we are all interacting through multiple social channels—we can now find people like ourselves who we trust and see what they like and dislike. This influences our decisions from the stuff we buy to the things we recommend. The best marketing in the world tries to simulate this, but usually ends up coming off as contrived. We unite when we act in ways that were informed by groups of people who we trust.

So it's an easy way to look at a complex subject. The subject of how technology continues to influence our behavior. I don't know about you—but I use the Web very differently than I did 5 years ago. See that little guy in the middle of the visual? That's the evolving customer/consumer/user/participant. Digital marketers who are using the same tactics that have worked in the past really need to think about that.

Tuesday, January 08, 2008

I am fairly certain that we are moving toward a time where the way we interact with brands and their products and services will seem infinite.

Think about it—we used to have few choices in how we engaged with an organization. If it were a bank, say 20 years ago—you had a teller, a checking account and that was pretty much it. Then ATM's came along. And banking by phone. Then over the Web. Then more services over them Web. Then you could dabble on your account with your mobile phone. And maybe you could even comment on the Banks company blog expressing your frustrations with their new ATM interface.

When I visited Dell a few months ago—I pointed out the obvious. That they had reached a point (probably ahead of most other companies) where they had multiple community/social touch points in place—each serving up a different experience, looking different and acting differently.

I was encouraged to hear that they were already on top of this—working to resolve the issue. Now, each of their "multiple social touch points" feels like it's part of a larger family. They are connected.

But 20 years from now, will our interactions with brands, companies and their products and services seem infinite? As we seem to have more options, channels communities and choices now—will they consolidate, or continue to expand?

I believe what we're experiencing right now is the beginning. It's why the media (and social media) landscape is fragmented. But instead of consolidation, maybe—just maybe the way we interact with brands, companies and their products and services will enter a state of flow. Probably not all—but maybe some. Infinite touch points means that options may seem endless, but the ideal experiences we have don't feel overwhelming.

Who will make these infinite touch points seem manageable? It will probably take all of us. Experience Designers will play a role. As will the sophisticated consumer. Will we define a social experience or a blog response as a touch point? It's entirely possible. But maybe, just maybe—each time we have any interaction with a brand's product or service we'll create a mental note of how that experience felt. If touch points become infinite—or just seem that way, then the opportunity for deeper levels of a relationship become possible.

But only if the infinite touch points succeed in reaching that ideal "iiquid state of flow"—or at least make it feel that way to the end user, consumer or participant.

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

Two things to know before reading further:1. This entry is more observation than prediction.2. By Mobile, what I really mean is the opposite of "immobile" or simply put—stuff you can take with you (think portable).

The way we interact with technology is changing. Computers used to be about work. Then they quickly became about play. Then work and play began to blur all together. Laptops and wireless set us free, but then laptops started feeling like work again. Social media, though it has real business applications feels like play—it's fun and quite addictive. 2007 was a big year for social media. 2008 may be the year mobile media really begins to take off. Here's a few thoughts to consider:

The iPhone EffectWhether or not Apple corners the mobile market is irrelevant. Apple has proven that the mobile experience doesn't have to suck and in fact can be delightful. It's kicked the mobile industry in the ass and is forcing them to innovate. This means that the mobile experience is going to get better for all of us, whether we choose to buy an iPhone, a Verizon Voyager or something else. The iPhone effect is making people feel like they need a "smart phone" the same way the RAZR made people feel like they needed a thin phone that did less but looked really cool. Better mobile experiences will eventually lead to more mobile behavior.

Mobile Content, Functionality and EngagementWidgets such as PayPal's latest entry into the market offer us a glimpse into the future. The hub and spoke model of the Web where all roads lead to Rome.com is becoming obsolete. Now we can even buy stuff through widgets which can be found virtually anywhere on the net. Fragmentation continues, proving it can stand the test of time by rearing it's head in not only traditional media—but on the Web and in even on the cutting edge of social media. Users will engage with content and features where it makes sense for them—on their terms and they can take it with them.

The Mobile WebThe Web isn't just on our computers and laptops anymore. It's on lots of devices and the experience we have with it keeps getting better. I actually prefer accessing Facebook on my iPhone because it's easy to use, less cluttered and fun. I can play around with it with the TV on in the background, or when I'm on the road. The upcoming open source model supported by Google's Android platform has the potential to eventually make the mobile Web ubiquitous. Amazon's Kindle may not be the e-book solution we've all been waiting for, but it certainly offers hints of disruption, especially as it pertains to students/education. The mobile Web offers the promise of freedom in the sense that it makes the Web fun again. We'll eventually be able to buy stuff when on the go and some banks even support mobile interactions. Being away from our desktops and laptops which now feel like work will make the mobile Web a welcome escape.A Mobile Network Just recently I had lunch at a Corner Bakery which now offers free Wi-Fi similar to Panera. As more businesses offer free Wi-Fi, we can enjoy all the benefits of a better mobile experience + speedy connection to the internet. Social experiences will become mobile as we keep up with our networks not only though Websites. but through widgets and multiple devices.

2008 is a good year to think beyond Websites and start thinking about lifestyles—how we live and why we do what we do. The Web isn't going away—but the way we interact with it, might just turn into a moving target. Actually, it already is.

Thursday, October 25, 2007

You're watching a clip from Honeyshed. The much hyped service promises to bring "branded entertainment" to the masses. Droga5, the shop behind the effort positions Honeyshed as "QVC meets MTV".

OK, I've been on and off the site for a good portion of the day. And though it's in beta, I really don't get it. It took me a while to figure out that I couldn't buy stuff. I stumbled around the flash heavy interface, and really couldn't figure out what the heck I was supposed to do. Here's a snapshot of the chat (I'm user 26):

As you can see, I could not figure out how to buy stuff (which I thought I could, because I didn't read the Adweek article until after I decided to write about it). So, then I called "888-98-honey" for a little tech support—only to find out that the person on the line, while being a very nice person—had no idea how the site actually worked. She was however open to "chatting"—and we had a nice mid afternoon conversation.

I got as far as adding stuff to my "stash" only to have the option to send items to a friend. And that's when I bailed. Why would I want to send this stuff to a friend when I can't even figure out how to get it myself?

So what does the experience offer? Well, it offers up "hot girls" with minimal clothing and an abundance of hipster dialogue. So here's my question. I this brand entertainment? To me it feels like traditional advertising served up over the internet. It's got the typical hallmarks of bad traditional agency usability with "hipper than you" sensibilities. Oh wait, I just figured out how to buy stuff—you have to click on the thumbnail after you click on your "stash". It's a couple of clicks. Once you figure out what the heck a "stash" is... Would have been nice if they walked me through that on the phone.

Probably the only feature I like about it was the ability to embed videos. So what am I missing? Is this effective "brand entertainment"? Am I out of touch? Is "pre-commerce" the wave of the future? Or is Honeyshed bad daytime TV piped in through a broadband line? What do you think?

Wednesday, August 08, 2007

Hat tip to Geno Church over at Brains on Fire, who has visualized the "Cycle of a fan" (above). I really like the fan analogy as I think it's both common sense and accurate. Mack Collier has used this metaphor as well. Here's how Geno lays it out:

"Every fan has a story. Are you a fan of a college football team, a
baseball team, a car, a restaurant, or a musician? Maybe it’s even an
auto mechanic. Some of us show more “fan” behavior than others. I fall
in the fan bucket. I want more out of the experience than just
satisfaction. And I want more from that business or that team than just
allowing me to make a purchase from them."

Point is that before you become an evangelist—you have to become a fan. In order to become a fan, you have to have had a great experience with a product or service. I'm not sure that you have to be a participant before becoming a fan (unless using something is also included in participation) but fans are more likely to convert into both evangelists and engage in community. Read the whole post. Good food for thought—and nice visual! :)

Friday, July 27, 2007

"When I started in the business twenty-mumble years ago, writing
software manuals, people who used software were unusual (and had to be
masochists). We spent a lot of time talking about users. The word user
was helpful -- it helped us to keep in mind that there was a poor slob
on the other end of what we were building.

Those times are long gone. We know users are important now.
Disappoint them and you lose. So why do we still have to call them
"users," which puts the emphasis on the technology they are using?

Yes, I know "users are people, too." But you know what? All people are users now! (With nearly 80% Net penetration in the US this is pretty close to true.) Users put up with computers. People just do stuff.

Nobody talks about users of dishwashers, or users of retail stores,
or users of telephones. So why are we talking about "users" of
computers, browsers, and software?"

I'm all for "humanizing the experience"—but guess what? Sometimes labels help us to design better solutions, products and experiences for the PEOPLE who we serve who USE the stuff we develop for them. USERS. Some related thoughts below:

Originally posted on July 2006When is a person more than just a person? If you want to design for
people, don’t be afraid to “label” them. When used correctly, labels
clarify and add context. They tell us what is important and what takes
priority. An individual balancing their checkbook online is USING
technology to complete a task—so they can do other things that are
important (like putting the kids to bed). Someone listening to a
podcast is part of an AUDIENCE consisting of likeminded people who
share a common interest.

A person who decides to create their own online Ad after seeing what
others have done is an active PARTICIPANT. Someone who engages in the
social media network is part of a larger COMMUNITY. People who spend
their money online or in the real world are CUSTOMERS. And when we
partake in an economy where goods and services are bought, sold and
exchanged then we become CONSUMERS—in addition to PEOPLE.

Labels help. Labels help us remember what’s important. Designing
an interface that is useful and usable makes for a happy user. Happy
users make happy people. And happy people tell good stories about your
brand to others.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

E-consultancy recently came up with a list of top user experience professionals as ranked by general awareness and reputation. Interesting to see that Seth Godin came up on the list as well—though I feel he's more in the marketing camp in comparison to the others. The names are:

So let's have a little fun. I've re-created the list and swapped out Seth and the Eisenberg brothers (an editorial modification). I also added a second list with some names that aren't as recognizable, but are making an impact in the profession (including yours truly—hey, it's my blog ;). In the "democratized" Web—how do you see it? Voting on the ones you feel strongly about will probably move them up on the list. Not selecting will have the opposite effect. You can also add names manually if you don't see someone who you think should be on the list. I'll give this some time and post the results when activity dies down.

I don't know where this will go—but what the heck?Feed readers can vote here and here.

During a discussion about Ultimate Fighting, which is a mixed
Martial arts sport, Jon says that by combining all the fighting
disciplines you lose the form and artistry of each. (Indeed Ultimate
Fights usually just ends up with two guys rolling around on top of each
other on the ground.)

John Hodgman refutes Jon’s statement with “So why combine a cellphone and a camera then?”

Jon comes back with “Why? That’s my question. You just end up with a
crappy phone and a crappy camera.” It receives big cheers from the
audience and at this point Hodgman concedes that Jon wins the round."

Honestly, I think Jon's argument is one of the lamest I've heard about why the IPhone could possible fail. I won't go into reasons why it might fail—I haven't had a chance to play with one yet. But the "people don't want convergence" argument is thin stuff. Here's why. Jon's comments imply that someone will buy a phone with camera or video to replace their current equipment. This is nonsense. Smartphones act as "supplements" and appeal to people who want to e-mail, browse the web or take a spontaneous picture now and then. Is it even possible to buy a phone without a camera in it these days? Do you want a phone without one?

These features support the evolution of human behavior fueled by classic needs (like the need to connect + share). I see moms and dads at Target and Home Depot snapping pictures of a product they are interested in and sending it to their spouse to take a look. I see people commuting to work glued to their mobile e-mail as they make their way home. Have these people thrown out their computers or digital cameras?

No—the "crappy phone, crappy camera" argument is thin. And what about video? We've already seen a surge of vidoes uploaded and distributed on YouTube taken by people on their mobile phones. Is the video good quality? As good as a the latest digital cam corder? No, of course not. But it supports a shift in human behavior. It's called citizen journalism—or marketing. I think there may have been a few books written about this phenomenon.

Jon should stick with the jokes. PS, phones are lifestyle devices—or at least many phones are beginning to achieve this status. We all have different lifestyles with different needs. I may not get an iPhone. But the new Blackberry Curve (shown above) is looking awfully tempting to me. With a 2 megapixel camera, media player and full sized QWERTY, maybe it fits my current state of human behavior. It might not fit yours. And that's OK.

Friday, May 11, 2007

Leisa over at Disambiguity says "Yes, you should be using personas". I agree. And I would take it one step further. In addition to using personas, shouldn't we take a step back and visualize the "persona ecosystem"? Personas are an effective way to look at users/consumers/customers in a way that goes deeper than marketing demographics. In fact, a persona that is done right shouldn't look much like a marketing segment at all (though it can still contain basic demographic info such as age etc.)

"Personas or personae are fictitious characters that
are created to represent the different user types within a targeted
demographic that might use a site or product. Personas are given
characteristics and are assumed to be in particular environments based
on known users’ requirements so that these elements can be taken into
consideration when creating scenarios for conceptualizing a site.
Cooper (1999) outlined the general characteristics and uses of personas
for product design and development.

In the context of software requirements gathering, a user persona is
a representation of a real audience group. A persona description
includes a user’s context, goals, pain points, and major questions that
need answers. Personas are a common tool in Interaction Design (IxD)"

Personas often combine narratives and sometimes scenarios that often go into great detail to paint a plausible profile which looks at a person's motivations, goals, mindset, wants, needs, desires etc. And often times, personas are often cross-channel—taking a holistic look at the entire consumer experience.

What I've been toying with is the idea of showing the persona ecosystem in a simplistic and visual format (shown above). This artifact would not replace a persona—on the contrary it should co-exist with one. Where a persona can go deep, a persona ecosystem can go broad showing what is influencing the individual's behavior as well as what channels and touch points they may use.

Tip of the hat to Julie Fleischer who helped inspire the "Planner-In-Chief" shown in this particular example. Happy to say that Julie is now working with Digitas Chicago.

Thursday, November 30, 2006

The US Postal Service has entered the 21st century ;) Though I haven't personally used this feature yet, apparently you can order and pay for parcel service online but most importantly you can set a time for the USPS to come pick it up at your house—all free of charge.

I did spend a little time on the site which appears to target small business owners. For the most part it seemed fairly clear and intuitive. This might be a good option for those of us who dread going to the post office—especially around the holiday season.

Now before you take either side of the debate regarding the role and future of Information Architects (IA's), I would ask this question. Does the term accurately represent what a (insert title here) does? Or if you are an IA, do you feel it does?

The answer probably depends on the type of work you are doing and how you do it.

I began working with IA's back in 1998 when the role consisted mainly of—well, organizing information in a cohesive and usable format in the context of Website design. Since then, the profession, practitioners and certainly the Web have all evolved considerably. From my perspective, one of the most significant changes has been the shift from Websites to interactive experiences which actually have more in common with actual products than they do their ancestral Web counterparts. In short, unless you are working on a traditional site structure, what you do may have more in common with product design than information architecture. Several years ago, I moderated a work session at the IIT Strategy conference where we discussed a related topic.

If you look at the description, you'll notice that I didn't use the title Information Architects even though that's what we called them at agency.com. I referred to the discipline as Interaction Designers (ironically, that's the title we use at Digitas). In my opinion it's a broader term that is more accurate to the direction that IA seems to be gradually moving in.

The difference? The words Interaction + Design. Design used not to denote aesthetic, but as the thinking process of how we interact with something, and the experience we have from it. Yes it's also about usability—but like product design it involves some degree of visual appeal as well—and of course functional. And methods like prototyping, proof of concepts, etc.—all borrowed from product design.

So should the title "Information Architect" go away? Actually, I don't think so. The reality is that there is still "classic IA" work which needs to be done out there and if that's the majority of the service your firm offers—it makes sense to use it (just look at the cover of the book—"Designing Large Scale Web Sites"). However, if the majority of what you do feels more like designing interactive product/experiences, vs. a large scale Website—it might be worth taking a look at.

Joshua makes this final point:

"But the fact is that IA is a theory about the inherent structure of information…the architecture of information…and if we are moving away from that we should call it something else.

Relationship Architecture, perhaps?"

Interesting thought, but I think it gets too specific. Again, if we make this about what accurately describes what you do—it's simple. Do you architect information? Do you design interactions? Or maybe you architect digital experiences? Hmmm, Experience Architect—that has a nice ring to it too. :)

Sunday, November 19, 2006

If you use Bloglines to manage your growing blog habit, you might be familiar with this little guy. The Bloglines Plumber. To be fair, Bloglines doesn't break down all that much—however, each time I see this cuddly persona, I always wonder exactly what Bloglines is trying to tell me. Here are some associations I have personally when it comes to plumbing/plumbers and little "fixer uppers".

-Emergency-Last resort-Expensive-Hard to fix-More complex than it looks-Plumber's crack (sorry!)-Leaky stuff-It's not fixed right—need to come back again

Well, I guess I've had some bad plumbing experiences, but maybe I'm not the only one?

I totally get what Bloglines wants to do. They know that people get irritated when service is down, so they are adding a little personality/humor to their message. Don't want to over think this, but the way we handle our service messages is important. So is the gimmick really needed?

Sometimes a simple, earnest statement that you're "on it" is all it takes. Sorry Bloglines Plumber, you're cute—but cute doesn't offer me reassurance that I'll be able to read my feeds any time soon.

Thursday, November 16, 2006

Nintendo has uploaded a video Ad on You Tube and disabled the embed feature. So you have to go to You Tube to view it there. Don't spend too much time digging around for it. It's a typical 30 second spot, manufactured hipness and all—you're not missing out on much.

Friday, November 10, 2006

If you are into customer experiences and how we consumers are changing our behavior as a result of the digital experience renaissance, you should check out this post over at 3mew

The author of the blog gives a detailed account of how he researched eyeglasses online, saved a boatload of cash and was pretty happy with the experience in the process.

"Without question, I’ll order from each of these places in the future.
The prescriptions are tack sharp, the selections are better than the
stores and the prices are incredible. Eyeglasses for less than a pair
of shoes? Yes, please."

So says the author of the blog. Now here's a snippet from an optometrist that posted a lengthy comment in response:

"You may be able to find a silhouette frame a little cheaper online but
you are also forfeiting correct measurements and the service provided
(future repairs and adjustments, complimentary ultrasonic cleanings,
etc). Stores also have more overhead (salaries for qualified and
experienced opticians, ulitity bills, etc) so you are paying for more
than just the frame…you are paying for the overall service. Also, let’s
not forget that by patronizing local stores, you are helping the local
economy."

If you have time to read the post and skimming the 33 comments—it's worth it. It raises some interesting thoughts about the customer mindset, especially when they feel like they aren't receiving value. And of course it raises questions about what we thought could and couldn't be done digitally (purchasing eye wear).

It also raises the question of influence. On one hand, you have an articulate individual talking about a good experience he had, and on the other you have an articulate individual defending his craft. I think these discussions will continue to intensify given the things we can now do that we were not able to in the past.

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

Here’s something to pin up on your cube or office wall Download 12_values.pdf
. The next time you work on a major marketing or interactive initiative—ask yourself this question: “is what I’m doing hitting at least some of the consumer values on this list”? The 12 Consumer Values to Drive Technology-related Product and Service Innovations was created by the Washington, DC-based research and consulting firm Social Technologies. My rationale for putting this into wall-friendly visual is simple: I think agencies run the risk of infatuation with YouTube and the temptation to put all their eggs in one viral video basket. And we have to be careful about not neglecting other areas of marketing innovation.

“With not a penny of paid media and in less than a month, "Dove Evolution," a 75-second viral film created by Ogilvy & Mather, Toronto, for the Unilever brand has reaped more than 1.7 million views on YouTube and has gotten significant play on TV talk shows "Ellen" and "The View" as well as on "Entertainment Tonight." It's also brought the biggest-ever traffic spike to CampaignForRealBeauty.com, three times more than Dove's Super Bowl ad and resulting publicity last year, according to Alexa.com.”

Now in my opinion, that video was simply amazing. A powerful, compelling story that draws you in and inspires you to share it with others. But what about the experience it links you to? Complete with E-cards and a message board, CampaignForRealBeauty.com is a respectable site—but could it be doing more when you apply the 12 values to it?

My point here is that the gi-normous success of YouTube may tempt the Ad industry to hyper-focus on viral videos as an inexpensive way to generate buzz (and ROI). Nothing wrong with this at all—but we cannot forget that at the end of the day, a video is a passive experience. It can make us laugh, cry and want to share it with others—we just can’t interact with or actively engage with a video. In contrast, you CAN interact with YouTube itself. Imagine if an agency had come up with that idea?

So on that note, here is the full list as conceived by Social Technologies. It’s worth chewing on.

User creativity
Consumers increasingly want to create, augment, or influence design and
content, and share these creations with their peers. Supporting user
creativity will be increasingly important to consumer technology, and
will become more mainstream in coming decades.

Personalization
Consumers will increasingly look for products and services that align
with their specific personal needs and preferences—whether in the
aesthetics of a product or in its functional design. More goods will be
created to match individuals’ unique specifications.

Simplicity
Simplicity will have growing value for consumers confronted with
information overload, time stress, and technological complexity.
Simplicity’s influence is already evident in new, stripped-down devices
that offer just a few functions, as well as in minimalist interfaces
that conceal breathtaking complexity. The common denominator of all
these efforts is that they are human-centered—and thus easy to learn
and integrate into busy lives.

Assistance
As consumers are bombarded with more tasks, choices, and information,
and as demographic changes such as aging reshape consumer markets, they
are looking to assistive technologies for help. Consumers will seek to
bolster and extend their natural abilities—with technologies ranging
from pharmaceuticals that enhance mental performance to robot aides for
the elderly.

Appropriateness
Products and services will need to embrace the principle of
appropriateness to ensure that they are suitably designed for users
with varying physical needs, resources, cultural characteristics,
literacy levels, etc. Appropriateness will aid in the spread of
technology products and services to new markets and to diverse user
segments.

Convenience
Already well-established in mature markets, demand for convenience will
rise as a technology value for consumers all over the world. Consumers
will look for technological products and services that give them what
they want and need on demand and that reduce effort and relieve time
pressure.

Connectedness
Connectedness gives consumers what they want, when they want it, and
will grow exponentially with the expanding global information
infrastructure. Consumers will look for products and services that
seamlessly integrate with this global network.

Efficiency
Efficiency is the ratio of output to input—or, put simply, the ability
to do more with less. It will become more important to technology as
consumers search for products and services that let them manage
emerging resource uncertainties, rising costs, and other pressures.

Intelligence
Intelligence will be enabled by innovations that increasingly shift
information and decision-making burdens from the user to the device or
service. The demand for greater intelligence will come in response to
factors including complexity, aging, and the desire for personalized
experiences.

Protection
Protection will be sought by consumers in a world that feels
increasingly insecure. Consumers will look for technology-enabled
products and services that strengthen their sense of personal security
and protect their families, homes, wealth, and privacy.

Health
Consumers will look to technological products and services to maintain
and, increasingly, improve their health and wellness. The search for
health-enabling solutions will extend beyond traditional health and
medical products and services to include more of the things consumers
use in their everyday lives, whether at home, work, or play.

Sustainability
Consumers will increasingly look for products and services that embrace
sustainability—reducing the “human footprint” on the environment while
maintaining quality of life. A variety of technologies offer ways to
minimize resource use, waste, and pollution while improving human
welfare.

Thursday, October 12, 2006

The Rolling Stones played Chicago last night and I was there. Mick was struttn’, Keith was smokin’ Ron was strumming and Charlie was smiling. The more I thought about it, marketing can learn a lot from a Stones show. Here’s how:

Provide ValueYou’re going to pay a lot of money to see the Stones and they know it—so they do their best to put on a good show. Fireworks, an elaborate stage design, and Mick never stops moving. The Stones work really hard at making sure you feel that your money was well spent.

Transcend GenerationsThere were people in their sixties belting out tunes right along sixteen year olds. Stones music has a way of bringing generations together. Age becomes irrelevant.Embrace Your AudienceOne of the more interesting parts of the show included a stage that detached and moved several hundred feet into the heart of the audience. It was the next best thing to the band getting down from the stage and mingling with the audience. They played several songs in this position and for a while, the people who has the worst seats now had the best ones.

Show Your HumanityThe weather last night in Chicago was brutal. Temperatures suddenly plummeted below 30 degrees and it felt like the dead of winter. My hands got numb after 5 minutes of being outside of gloves yet there was Keith plucking his six string with an expression that showed a little more pain than usual. The Stones didn’t ignore the non-ideal weather, they made jokes about it—they showed their humanity, but at the end of the day the show went on.

Deliver A Memorable ExperienceMick changed his wardrobe for nearly every song. In fact, the stage, lighting and video effects were different for every song. This made songs like “Sympathy for the Devil” feel like they each were their own unique brands. Because in a way—they are.

Leave A Lasting ImpressionAt the end of the show, every musician lined up, put their arms over each others shoulders and bowed several times. It was a graceful way to end the show—and in an odd way, you could tell that each of them were happy to get out of the cold weather yet the body language seemed to say "the cold couldn't stop us—you matter that much to us". And seeing the band and supporting members reminds you that it’s not just the Stones behind that show, it’s every member of the band, crew and even the audience ourselves that they were celebrating.

Imagine if every marketing initiative did even a few of these things this well...

Saturday, October 07, 2006

Was walking by a Bank of America branch this morning, and what I saw in the front window stopped me in my tracks. Usually the first impression you get with banks is the cluster of ATMs combined with an array of promotion materials touting the latest rates.

But what was different about the first impression of this particular branch was their "lounge" which included a gorgeous flat screen, designer lighting, leather chairs and gourmet coffee. And as it was being used. As I snapped off the photo, a couple was hanging out catching up on some new via CNN.

I wouldn't say this is totally innovative, but it is effective. Carving out a simple and tasteful "oasis" at the front of the branch, really made for a positive first impression. Something to think about in regards to our own "digital branches". What kinds of little things can we do to make our first impressions just a little more effective?

Friday, September 22, 2006

Actually—they want my nickels. Starbucks has announced a price hike of five cents per cup. No big deal right? Personally, I’m annoyed by it because Starbucks has been gradually losing favor in my eyes and this doesn't help.

"SEATTLE — Starbucks (SBUX)
said Thursday that it plans to raise prices of its lattes, cappuccinos,
drip coffee and other drinks 5 cents, or an average 1.9%.

The increase, effective Oct. 3 at all
company-operated stores in the USA and Canada, marks the first time the
company has boosted drink prices in two years.

...Currently, a tall, or 12-ounce, cup of Starbucks
coffee costs $1.40 to $1.65. Twelve-ounce lattes cost $2.40 to $3.10,
depending on the market, and a tall mocha costs $2.70 to $3.40."

The Starbucks brand has been lauded as the poster child of the experience economy. Provide a high-end experience that customers cannot get elsewhere—one that they crave, and you can charge a premium for your product and services while your brand enjoys the benefits of unconditional love and adoration from your customers and brand evangelists. Or at least so the theory goes.

But in my opinion, something has been happening to Starbucks gradually since their early days. The quality of the “Starbucks Experience” isn’t what it used to be. It’s the little things. The Baristas are inconsistent. Some are great and some are terrible. Some of the Starbucks that I walk into are really cool—they take advantage of the local feel of the area they are located in. Others feel like “fast drink”. No better than McDonalds—but 5x the price. Some of the Starbucks that I’ve frequented are just trying too damn hard—thumping their Starbuck compilation CD's at high volume. Hey, is this Starbucks or The Gap?

Don’t they realize I want the Coffee to wake me up? Not the warbling vocals of Jewel.

So five little cents. For coffee that’s already overpriced. But again, in this experience economy—it was never about the coffee in the first place right? It’s about HOW you got that coffee and what you look like when you are walking around with your Starbucks cup vs. a cup from Dunkin’ Doughnuts.

But lookout Starbucks. I’m really liking both the taste and experience of the coffee I get from places like Intelligensia, Caribou, and the local shops that are thankfully popping up again. There’s one right by my house that serves Illy coffee, which as far as I am concerned makes Starbucks taste like roasted dirt in comparison. Personally, I think Starbucks coffee is good, but not amazing. So if I'm going to pay—the experience better be solid.

Wednesday, September 13, 2006

(click for larger image)Here is a simple exercise. Don't overthink this one. Let's say you've completed the strategy phase, you've briefed the team, you've found that core insight and you have a concept that you are ready to execute against. Before you site down and put that mouse to work—take a step back and think of the experience you are about to architect and design. Think of it as a house.

What is the foundation you are going to build it upon? It should be the core needs of the business, brand and the customer of course. Now what will be the core "pillars" that will support the entire experience? There are a number of ways you can break down the experience. For the example above (a financial services site) I chose these:

These are interchangeable, but served the purpose for this particular example. The purpose was to think about the execution before we got knee deep into it. The adjectives such as "simple", "organic" and "clean" are tangible terms that resonate with designers.

So the next time you're ready to execute. When the brief has been briefed and the strategy has been strategized. Think about the house you are about to build. Your users might have to live in it for a while.

Now, I will probably still be a fan of 37 Signals, because I find value in their thoughts and philosophies. But it does make me think. Should I blindly "endorse" any organization because I like what they say and how they say it? Shouldn't I actually try their products for myself before I speak well (or ill) of anyone?

I guess I could be overthinking this, Maybe for me the product that 37 Signals offers which I find value in is their "thought leadership" Maybe that's enough. Or maybe this site is a fluke and Basecamp is as good as most of the reports say it is. This site could be a sign that Basecamp is becoming mainstream, or it could be an authentic gripe (like Apple has experienced in the past and most recently Facebook).

I guess one thing is for certain. If even one customer has a gripe with your product/service these days. You're gonna know about it.

Have you ever noticed that movements happen in waves across both the blogoshphere as well as the mainstream media (often times in sync)? I've been coming across a lot of posts recently that involve putting customers first, and making them happy. Now, this is nothing new, and it's one of those things that is easier said than done. And maybe that's why it's said so often (because we aren't doing it).

It's like telling someone with the attention span of a gnat the same things over and over again in the hopes that one day, they will actually dot it.

Well here is a little gem for the attention-challenged in all of us. It lays out a simple plan for putting customers first.

"1.Eliminate the customer obstacle course. If you asked
customers they’d say that the obstacle course for figuring out who to
talk to and how and when to get service is over-complicated,
conflicting and just plain out of whack

2.Stop customer hot potato. He who speaks to the customer
first should “own” the customer. There’s nothing worse that sends a
signal of disrespect faster than an impatient person on the other end
of the line trying to pass a customer off to “someone who can better
help you with your problem.” Yeah, right.

3.Give customers a choice. Do not bind your customer into
the fake choice of letting them “opt out” of something. Let them know
up front that they can decide to get emails, offers or whatever from
you and give them the choice.

4.De-silo your website. Our websites are often the cobbled
together parts created separately by each company division. The
terminology is different from area to area, as are the menu structures
and logic for getting around the site. What’s accessible online is
frequently inconsistent, as is the contact information provided.

5.Consolidate phone numbers. Even in this advanced age of
telephony companies still have a labyrinth of numbers customers need to
navigate to talk to someone. All of these grew out of the separate
operations deciding on their own that they needed a number to “serve”
their customers. Get people together to skinny-down this list and then
let customers know about it. There’s no big red button to push to make
this happen. It requires the gnarly hard work of collaborating and
collective decision making – but get it done already! Customers are fed
up.

6.FIX (really) the top ten issues bugging customers. We
have created a kind of hysterical customer feedback muscle in the
marketplace by over-surveying our customers and asking (ever so
thoughtfully) “how can we improve?” Customers have told us what to do
and we haven’t moved on the information.

7.Help the front line to LISTEN. We’ve robotized our
frontline to the customer all over the world. Let them be human, give
them the skills for listening and understanding and help the frontline
deliver to the customer based on their needs.

8.Deliver what you promise. There is a growing case of
corporate memory loss that annoys and aggravates customers every day
The customer has to strong-arm his/her way through the corporate maize
just to get basic things accomplished. They’re exhausted from the
wrestling match, they’re annoyed and they’re telling everyone they
know. And, oh, by the way, when they get the chance they’re walking.

9.When you make a mistake – right the wrong. If you’ve got
egg on your face, for whatever the reason, admit it. Then right the
wrong. There’s nothing more grossly frustrating to customers than a
company who does something wrong then is either clueless about what
they did or won’t admit that they faltered.

10.Work to believe. Very little shreds of respect remain,
if any, after we’ve put customers through the third degree that many
experience when they encounter a glitch in our products and services
and actually need to return a product, put in a claim or use the
warranty service. As tempting as it is to debate customers to uphold a
policy to the letter of the law, suspend the cynicism and work to
believe your customers."

Common sense stuff? Of course it is. So why do so few companies actually practice these things? Yeah, we're all guilty. Maybe it's time to act.

Wednesday, September 06, 2006

As the quality of digital experience improves, the value of creating passionate users is becoming clear to brands wishing to thrive in the "experience economy". Provide an experience that is both useful, usable, desirable, and differentiated and you will create demand for your brand and delight your customers.

But if passionate users (or customers, or consumers) is the "WHAT"—the end result which we aspire to attain, then what about the "HOW" in regards to the role in which design plays in all of this? And I'm not just talking about visual design here. As designers of digital experiences, what are we doing to develop compassion toward the users we are designing for?

Ok, if you are going to get defensive while reading this article, now might be the right time. If you are an Interaction Designer, you probably feel that your whole existence is dedicated to meeting the wants and needs of users. If you are a Visual Designer, you might feel that you possess heightened sensitivities which allow you to be more "empathetic" while designing for your audience.

Well, if you feel you are doing all you can to be a compassionate designer, then there is no need to continue reading. But if you think you can do more, then read on. I have this theory. My theory is that when we feel that we get really good at something. When we begin to consider ourselves "experts", that is when we become "at risk" for losing (or de-emphasizing) our compassion for the customer—the people we design for.

Think about it this way. It happens to Doctors. The people who swear to uphold Hippocratic oaths. The same people who sometimes hold the key to life or death. When a Surgeon gets so good at his or her craft, sometimes compassion takes a back seat to the honorable goal of saving lives. Sometimes bedside manners become compromised in the process of moving on to the next patient. It's not intentional or out of malice—it just happens. All professionals are vulnerable to this. When we get really good at something, we're tempted to think "I've done this hundreds of times—I know what I'm doing."

We are tempted to think "this is my area of expertise".

Usability, Interface Design. Visual Design. Motion Design. Copywriting. All of the above. Let's be honest with ourselves. How many times have we made a design decision that was in the interest of winning an award rather than winning over the customer? Or how many times have we included a deliverable because it validated our role as opposed to validating the life of a consumer?

We've all done it. Oh, you haven't? Liar.

What exactly does it mean to be a compassionate designer? It means doing things that help us not only understand, but relate to the users we design for. To feel for them. To put ourselves in their shoes, even if our own lives are totally opposite from them. Sound simple? It is. You just have to do it.

Here are some practical ways we can develop compassion for our users:

1. Get out of the officePut down that design magazine and boxes+arrows article. Go out into the real world. Watch. Listen. Observe.

2. Talk to someoneTalk to the people you are designing for. Chances are you won’t be able to relate to them at first. When you get to this point—then you know you’re doing something right.

3. Eat, Sleep, Dream CuriosityBe curious. Be very curious. Don’t know how? Find yourself a five-year-old, and hang out with them for a while. Then ask the same questions they do.4. Do what they doAre you designing for stay-at-home moms? Take the day off and go to a park. Hover around schools during drop off time. Walk a mile in their shoes. Better yet, just walk with them.

Several years ago, I found myself in a spirited discussion with my Creative Director over a design we were proposing for a large B2B distributor. The design was minimal. It was all about speed and efficiency. It was designed for a person who didn't want to spend a lot of time ordering supplies, and had better things to do with their time. It was designed for the type of person who could not care how many times you told them "we're here to help". It was designed for someone who needs proof, every day. "You want to help me? Make it easy, fast, and reliable".

Now my Creative Director didn't like what he was seeing.

"Where's the value proposition?"

"Where are the pictures of people being helped?" "If I'm coming to this Website for the first time, I have no idea what this brand stands for". All noble concerns. Only one problem. He didn't take the time to get to know the customers. He felt he knew them. He made assumptions about them from everything he thought he knew in his career (and personal experience), but he never even asked me about them. I toured the distribution centers, attended scores of user tests, and made the effort to reach out to every contractor I could get my hands on. Luckily I had a couple in my family.

The design direction in many ways went against my personal preferences. It was visually appealing but lacked a "story". It did so because I knew in my heart that the best story we could tell these customers was to not tell them one at all. The most compassionate thing we could do was show them the story.

But this wasn't only about the customer, it was also about the brand.

The brand stood for "getting the job done". And that's just what the site did. The fact that it lacked "lifestyle" imagery only reinforced to users that the site "understood" them. It wasn't talking to them about helping. It was doing it with very little lip service. Which is exactly what they needed to experience.

If we feel for the people we design for—we will do what is in their best interest. And that is being a compassionate designer.

What happens when you don't get your experience design right? When you don't take the time to understand your users? When your user experience is not exactly in sync with what your users want, need and desire? You get a full on revolt from the people who keep you in business.

"The new home page of Facebook features updates on every single thing
your friends are doing on the Facebook network. Whether they became
single recently, signed up for a new class, or ate a corn dog… you’re
going to hear about it. One would think users would appreciate the
changes in terms of Web 2.0, think again! The new homepage has become a
headache to users and peeping toms watching every move you make on the
social networking giant. Simply put, users feel betrayed. Facebook
members have taken their disgust a step further by starting a Facebook petition to resist the step forward into Web 2.0."

Did anyone take the time to test these new feeds and features? I mean really test it? Get to the heart of the matter to see of Facebook users wanted (and needed) these kinds of features? Hello? Is anyone out there?

Wednesday, August 30, 2006

Tom Asacker is a no-nonsense, tell-it-like-it-is change agent. His recent article contains quite a few metaphors used to make a point about the intense need for change in marketing. My favorite part of the article:

The Masses Have Left the Tree

"The marketplace of old resembled a mass of caterpillars hanging around the tree of traditional media,venturing down the branches of mass distribution, and consuming the offshoots of brand advertisers. No more. The masses have escaped their pupae, spread their distinctive wings, and are fluttering around fields blossoming with an abundance of colorful and succulent offerings. A fleeting glimpse is all one usually gets of them. So what’s a marketer to do in this chaotic environment of abundant products andservices, fast-flying consumers, and a rapidly changing landscape?

1. Be wherever and whenever your audience is most receptive to your message (verifiable metrics be damned). Like butterflies (okay, enough with the metaphors), consumers are best observed when they are “feeding.” With some experience, you’ll quickly learn to find "hot-spots" of butterfly activity;

2. Get their attention by being unique, relevant, and authentic. Bright, plastic flowers may attract butterflies from a distance. But once they get close enough, if it’s the wrong species or devoid of aromaand taste, they’ll quickly flit away to something worth engaging with;

3. Deliver value in exchange for their time, since the key to long-term marketing success (read: ROI) is toget them to come back for more, and to bring all of their friends; and

4. Keep notes on what you observe regarding the habitat, the offering, the way the butterfly moves and communicates, and other matters of interest. And you can leave your nets at home. You’re not trying to capture anything."

Tuesday, August 22, 2006

I'm in the middle of doing what millions of us do each year (or every couple of years). Enduring a visit to the local Department of Motor Vehicles (or DMV). But I've been noticing something different about it each time I come. Mainly, that it keeps getting easier. I know. Hard to believe. But the branch that I go to in Chicago must have had an experience design professional consult with them or something. While sitting waiting for your number, you also get clear audio cues when called. Plus, once your number is called--it stays up on the display for a bit so if you didn't hear it beaing called you still have a chance. All of the signs were clearly displayed and provided visual cues so you knew where to go next. The flow was intuitive and natural.

Each time I completed a step, I had to move to the next station located over to the right. The lighting was appropriate and the employees were relatively friendly (yes. I actually wrote that). What's happening here? Though it's a smart move, the city of Chicago really doesn't have a ton of incentive to improve the DMV experience right? I mean, people still HAVE to go to the DMV. It's not like we have a choice. And think about the crappy experiences we all have at the DMV. I mean, it's like we expect it to be bad. The reason why I think it's smart to have a good DMV experience is because the city of Chicago realizes that people associate interactions like this with the city itself. Chicago is one of the hardest working towns around because it feels like it has to compete with the coasts.

Mayor Daley is constantly pumping money into the lakefront, park programs, airports and other areas that people have "first contact" experiences when visiting. Think about it. One of the first places you need to go when you move into a town is the DMV. You'll eventually need to update license, registration ect. So a good experience here says a little something about the town you chose to move to. So if this DMV can get it right, how much more are we tasked to? Are your Websites usable? Do your marketing strategies make people feel good about the time they chose to spend with you? Do your brand initiatives make people say "this is why I stay with this brand. They get it right".

So are you providing great experiences that put other brands to shame? I don't live in Chicago because they have an effective DMV. But I do live here because the city offers culture, business, a stellar waterfront, and my family enjoys good schools and neighborhoods. Think of these as "touch points". Each touch point matters. Each experience influences my decision to stay or move. Brands, agencies, businesses and everyone else. Make sure you take care of even your smallest touchpoints. They matter. And we remember them. Each and every one.

Wednesday, August 09, 2006

Scott over at Experience Planner has a great write up on the reason Starbucks' stock price has taken a serious nose-dive. Is it because they aren't doing enough marketing? Not enough viral? Or "WOM"?

The Starbucks stock plunge is a symptom of the other kind of "Word of Mouth". You know, when people have a crappy experience and they tell others about it. Or when they go to your competitor because you have let them down. From Scott's post:"Here’s what CEO, Jim Donald has to say about it (c/o Guardian):

“We have recognised the opportunity to
refine and improve our cold beverage station to make drink preparation
more efficient and improve service over time but, in retrospect, we did
not move aggressively enough.”

Now in contrast, take a look at Motorola's stock performance in the past 5years. The upward trend nearly aligns with the release of the wildly popoular RAZR:

It's all a reminder that we need to focus on BOTH innovation + execution (and customer service). We need to concentrate on our "products". The things that we produce, even if they are considered a service. In other words, provide a good experience so people will say good things about us. After all, the average customer is your most effective marketer.

Tuesday, August 01, 2006

Dell has re-designed their homepage. With much less emphasis on marketing/business segmentation. And it’s a good thing (although the segmentation is still present upon rollovers). Here is what they set out to do according to the Dell blog:

1) Simplicity. It was too cluttered; too many choices. Home page was overwhelming.

2) Show me the products. There were no products on the home page. None.

3) Avoid segmentation. Don't force me to segment myself.

And Here’s a few select quotes from Dell customers:

"The removal of enforced segmentation high up in the buying path is the first step, it's 10 years overdue frankly. It is not however gone, but that is a larger internal organizational problem that Dell has to overcome."

“Make it easy for me to define systems by my work profile and give me more guidance on what technologies could benefit me more than others. If I'm building it, I'm then likely to buy more"

Look, we marketers like our segments. We love packaging people into neat and tidy little nuggets with a bow on top. And frankly, we run the same risk with how we treat Personas if we’re not careful to focus on core behaviors and mindsets. So what are behaviors and mindsets? Well, in short it’s getting into the heads and emotions of your customers. But I’ll define it a little more specifically:

Behaviors: The types of things your customers want to DO . The way they might actually behave on your site. This means thinking about how they behave before even coming to your site and after leaving it. It’s less about what they THINK and more about how they ACT.

Mindsets: This is the context of where your customer is from. Are they logging on from a computer at work, at home, are there kids crying in the background? Are they in “browse mode”? Or do they have laser like focus and just want to complete a task. Getting the customer mindset right is incredibly important to an interactive experience. Much more so than the traditional marketing segment like how much they make annually and what kind of car they drive.

Now, I can go on and on about things like Personas, or coming up with stuff like a behavior grids, which explore all the possibilities of how a user may act. I'm leaving a lot out here. You can write a whitepaper on all of this material and trust me, I’ve worked through this kind of thing many times with clients who want customers to “pick who they are” at the beginning of a site experience and chart a course based on that segment.

This post is intentionally light as I wanted to capture the Dell change and some of the reaction to their new homepage. At some point I’ll do something else about segments from my perspective. So back to the Dell site, they are looking for more feedback on this change. If you are a customer, I suggest you speak up now.

Wednesday, July 19, 2006

What do Dell, Aol, Comcast, Coke, and Ford all have in common? Each has experienced first hand the effect of a new kind of “PR cycle” driven by immediate response (depicted here). This is a type of PR that hasn't traditionally existed until recent years—and is gaining momentum in a big way. So Dell launches a blog—who would even notice this in the “good old days”? In the old way, Dell would have done their thing and maybe sent out a press release. If they were lucky, they would have had a few news organizations pick up the story and maybe get a letter to the editor. But in today’s wired world, Dell’s blog has been one of the most talked about events in both traditional media and blogs where uncensored discussion happened almost immediately after. And let's not even get into the exploding laptop etc which only added more fuel to the fire so to speak .

And of course we can't forget AOL or Comcast, where in each case a “Power Consumer” armed with a recording device and social media technology was able to draw immediate attention to their story. Each caught the attention of the mainstream press early on. So are we looking at a new kind of PR? One where bloggers and mainstream media feed off of each other? How will companies choose to deal with instant feedback, criticism, dialogue and debate? Seems like the PR Pandora has left the box and isn’t going to be put back any time soon.

Monday, June 19, 2006

When is a person more than just a person? If you want to design for people, don’t be afraid to “label” them. When used correctly, labels clarify and add context. They tell us what is important and what takes priority. An individual balancing their checkbook online is USING technology to complete a task—so they can do other things that are important (like putting the kids to bed). Someone listening to a podcast is part of an AUDIENCE consisting of likeminded people who share a common interest.

A person who decides to create their own online Ad after seeing what others have done is an active PARTICIPANT. Someone who engages in the social media network is part of a larger COMMUNITY. People who spend their money online or in the real world are CUSTOMERS. And when we partake in an economy where goods and services are bought, sold and exchanged then we become CONSUMERS—in addition to PEOPLE.

Labels help. Labels help us remember what’s important. Designing an interface that is useful and usable makes for a happy user. Happy users make happy people. And happy people tell good stories about your brand to others.

Thursday, June 15, 2006

iMedia Connection has recently published “A Quick Guide to Integrated Marketing”. It’s another take on the all-too-familiar challenge of aligning multiple marketing initiatives across multiple channels with the goal of “integrating” these efforts to achieve marketing nirvana. Only one problem with this piece. What about the TOUCHPOINTS?

Before I go on—here is how I differentiate a channel from a touchpoint.

CHANNEL:A method of communication or interactivity that attracts, engages, or raises awareness among consumers. Channels may also involve participation and community especially among emerging media. Examples: TV, Radio, Direct Mail, Web, Blogs, Social Media, etc. TOUCHPOINT:How customers interact with a business or brand. Touchpoints usually involve some type of transaction or facilitation of a service. Touchpoints are experience-driven with the quality of the experience determining the effectiveness of a touchpoint. Example: catalogue, online catalogue, ATM, retail, online shopping, customer service, banking, online banking etc.

Brand Messages. That’s the key theme of the entire piece. Messaging the brand across multiple CHANNELS. There is nothing wrong with this—but here is the point. If marketing firms and agencies are serious about providing a comprehensive “brand message” across the media landscape—then they need to at least CONSIDER touch points too. I’ll use Citibank—my favorite example. Great online banking. Great offline banking. Great ATM Experience. And great marketing initiatives across all those wonderful “channels”. I know there are many agencies behind this (in addition to Citibank)—but I would like to think that somewhere, someone is thinking about how all of the marketing initiatives and customer experiences come together.

Don't marketers need to think about Brand Experience in addition to Brand Message?

Again—no mention of the customer experience anywhere in this “Integration”. So here’s how I’ll end this. If marketers really want to “integrate”—then we will talk about experiences as well. Until then it’s partial integration at best.

Monday, June 12, 2006

“why do we degrade people by the passive, inert term of “user.” People are rich, complex beings. They use our devices with specific goals, motives, and agendas.”

The EXPRESSIVE part of my head agrees with Don. We really need to lighten up on the jargon and lingo. But then my CURIOUS side takes over. WHY? What about the hugely successful blog Creating Passionate Users? WHAT IF they called it “Creating Passionate People”? Yuck. Sounds like a self help book. The title Creating Passionate Users provides me with context. It tells me what this blog is about and gives me an idea of what kind of content I can expect. So maybe we need to occasionally use terms like customers and users to help add a little context to our conversations.

And here’s some more food for thought. To Don’s point about the hotel experience—think about how we are treated as valued customers. Now picture yourself on a crowded train and think about how rude some people can be toward each other. Sometimes it’s not such a bad thing to call a human being a customer. Society tends to treat paying customers very well (though I wish we all treated other human beings a little more decently)—but that’s just how it is.

That said—I’m still in agreement with Mr. Norman’s general thought. We do need to keep the focus on people. Once we lose that—we forfeit purpose and the quality of our work degrades. However, I also think that some labels serve a purpose and help define context.

Wednesday, June 07, 2006

There’s been a decent amount of activity recently about the new creative mind that’s needed to drive engagements and experiences across the full landscape of touch points. This recent article from Adotas sums it all up perfectly.

And to celebrate the awareness, I've put this little visual together:

With consumer behavior evolving toward a more empowered status—the definition of creativity has shifted from one-dimensional skills to a four-dimensional type of creativity that blends logical thinking with creative problem solving. Individuals possessing this “New Creative Mindset” Download creative_mind.pdf
blend Analytical, Expressive, Curious and Sensual qualities into their thinking process. The result is a holistic approach to creativity that is effective across multiple touch points and experiences.

Monday, June 05, 2006

Luke Wroblewski over at Funtioning Form has put together a nice set of links that compile Design Thinking and Strategy approaches. Some of the resources include Tim Brown, Dan Pink, Roger Martin and Dan Saffer. Definitelty one to save.

Wednesday, May 24, 2006

I recently contributed the Featured Post on Marketing Profs—exploring the relationship between design as it relates to the next generation of marketing (marketing 2.0).

"What many of the IIT-type individuals may not realize is that they are marketers in a sense. The digital products/experiences
they help design are enabling people to connect with brands as
well as each other. You Tube, Flickr, Technorati, Typepad,
Facebook—these are the open source platforms that help us market
directly to each other. And the design thinkers at IIT have the right
skills to develop these platforms and make them work."

Tuesday, May 16, 2006

Remember those old EF Hutton Ads where everyone stopped in their tracks to listen to what they were saying? I've noticed that Cooper has a less dramatic, but similar effect in the industry. A couple of days ago, they released one of their newsletters, and I've been getting lot's of e-mail activity around some of the topics. Also noticed some references on a handful of industry blogs.

Cooper is a pioneer in User Experience/Interaction Design, and the Founder Alan Cooper did a lot of influential work in defining interactive Personas. If you don't want to subscribe to their newsletter, you can keep tabs on the topics here.

Friday, May 12, 2006

I’m a true believer in reflecting on the past as much as looking to the future. I was recently rummaging through some old materials and came across a deck I put together capturing some choice highlights from the AIGA Risk Reward Conference (.pps) back in 2000. There are some nice insights in the deck that I took away from the event. I recommend taking a quick look through it—as much of the thought is applicable today. What’s remarkable about this is that the conference had the same creative energy levels that we are seeing in the industry now. Back then anything seemed possible. There was so much going in between the traditional creative worlds and what we were seeing online. It was both a special and kind of crazy time.

We all know what happened shortly after 2000. The internet bubble burst, global terror reared it’s ugly head, and recession hit pretty hard. So temporarily, many of us had to put survival in front of creativity. Creativity never went away, it just took on a different shape for a while. Ironically, right after that conference, Risk became a dirty word. No one wanted to take risks. It was all about ROI.

Fast-forward to 2006. The internet is a finally a respectable business model—and many brands understand this. Advertising is being turned on it’s head—the 30 second spot is slowly losing it’s grip. Product Design has experienced an all out renaissance. Consumers control how they choose to interact with brands—they now have the power. Technology no longer drives—it enables. Design has gone mainstream—companies like Target and Apple have seen to this. I could go on...

Wow. It’s 2006 and I can’t believe I survived those years in between 2000 to the present. And I’m glad I did. Looking back to the AIGA conference—I’m even more excited about creativity, innovation, and design then I was back then. Hard to believe.

Thursday, May 11, 2006

Let me get this straight. You start with a pile of goo. You give it a spine and evolve it. You design your creature from head to toe (if it has toes) so that it has the best chance of survival. Then you put it up against creatures that other players across the globe have created. Let the games begin.

Tuesday, May 09, 2006

Next week is going to be an exciting one in Chicago if you are into customer experience, brand strategy, experience design, innovation, creativity and business. On May 16-17, the IIT's Institute of Design is holding a two day conference, titled Strategy 06. Here is the description:

“The Institute of Design Strategy Conference is an
international executive forum addressing how businesses can use design
to explore emerging opportunities, solve complex problems, and achieve
lasting strategic advantage.”

"Are you involved in building interactive products? If you are a
business owner, designer, technologist, or information architect, you
will benefit from taking these four deep dives into essential aspects
of digital product design: company insight, user research, information
architecture, and interaction design.

This is a hands-on workshop. At the end of these two days, you will have the confidence to practice these methods in your work life."

I'll be attending the IIT Strategy conference where I'll be hosting a lunch round table discussion around the following topic:

“Playing In, Around and Outside of Your Sandbox

An Ad agency designs an experiential retail store in Times Square.A Product Design shop creates an interactive marketing campaign for a global company.A Marketing firm designs the interface for a leading gaming device.

What’s going on here? Why are some organizations “playing outside” of their immediate disciplines?

There seems to be an evolution going on before our very eyes. Organizations that understand how to plan, architect and design customer experiences are now doing work that may have previously been outside of their immediate offerings in the past. So what does this mean to the industry? Will skills become more specialized or generalized? Are walls coming down or is this just a natural progression? And how does this influence interdisciplinary teams positioned on the front lines?”

—The IIT event will also feature Bruce Nussbaum from Businessweek (view video from last year).
Bruce has become one of the most effective design/innovation
Evangelists to bridge the creative and business worlds.

As promised, I've been on the lookout for marketing efforts related to Motorola's long-awaited ultra-thin smart phone, the Q. Rumor has it that there will be a big announcement made in Central Park later this month. In the meantime, here's a pic from Michigan Ave in downtown Chicago with what appears to be a teaser Ad situated at a bus stop. There's no picture of the Q. Just hints of the screen and some of the features. Also, seems to have a lifestyle bent to it. More to come...

Friday, April 28, 2006

No, I'm not talking about Chicago. Though this city has been very good to me. I'm talking about citi (or Citibank for those who remember).

Why am I saying I'm in love with a bank? Who loves their bank?

Here is how the love affair began...

Love at first sightI was only sixteen. My brother whom I looked up to had an account with Citibank. I can remember watching him use the ATM's in one of the "blue branches". There was something about the combination of the actual branches which seemed so up-to-date and the ATM's highly sensory presentation which drew me to the bank. So when it came to opening up my own account, I naturally chose Citibank.

CommitmentIn my early career days, Citibank was always there for me. I could call them on the phone to get my account information and transfer balances. They would always let me know when my paycheck came in (a very important event for me in those days). And their ATM's were always in the branch—which seemed safe and secure. It was a relationship built on trust. I could trust them to be accessible. I could trust them with my money.

SmartOne day I got a floppy drive in the mail. I think of it as our first "love letter" (OK, I'm going overboard here, but it's intentional). Turns out that the floppy drive contained software that let me do some basic banking over the Internet. Let's put this in perspective—there was no online banking back then. I had a 32 bps dial up modem, a Mac, and an AOL account. And it all worked, It was glorious. I even did some bill paying.

In it for the long termI'm in this relationship for the long term. Why? Because citi has continued to "show me some love". Today, their online banking is fast, easy, and increadibly useful. I don't write checks, pay my bills digitally and can see my wife's actual cashed checks onscreen (she doesn't like that feature too much). Customer support is friendly and accessible and though they have changed their name and went from diamond to "arc"—to me they kept all the good parts the same.Morale of this little storyOK, so I exaggerated a little with the "love affair" stuff, but I am a loyal citi customer. Why? Because for over 14 years, they have provided me with good experiences. And if those experiences weren't always good—they would take measures to improve. They want me to be happy. And there is something from the online banking —to the branding I see when a Bus passes by. There is just something which makes it all click—and I still get little warm and fuzzy when I go into a branch. Like—I wouldn't want to bank anywhere else. So I guess the morale of the story is good experience + good brand = good for both me and citi.

Sunday, April 23, 2006

A really basic illustration of how customers—or even better, people—think. In this case the scenario is a "mother of the bride" in search of a gown for her daughters' wedding. And, she's just as comfortable shopping online as she is off. Let's call her "Samantha". Fail to meet Sam's rational needs, and she's gone. Fail to embrace her emotional needs, and she'll never tell anyone about you. In short, failure is not an option if you want to engage Samantha in an authentic relationship.